Court Character Reference | s 21A NSW, s 5 Vic, s 9 Qld

At its core, a character reference letter for court is evidence on sentence, not a testimonial. The defence solicitor tenders it, the court usually marks it as an exhibit, and the magistrate reads it before deciding penalty. It is addressed to "The Presiding Magistrate" or "Your Honour", signed and dated by the referee, and written in the referee's own words. The most important sentence in the whole document is the one where the referee confirms they know the precise offence and still hold the opinion they are about to give.

Two documents sit close to it. A statutory declaration under the Statutory Declarations Act 1959 is a solemn written declaration of fact, made before an authorised witness, and a false statement in it is a criminal offence. An affidavit is sworn or affirmed evidence, the standard way of putting facts before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. A court character reference is less formal than both, yet it is still read as evidence, so every statement in it must be true and within the referee's own knowledge.

No statute prescribes a form for a character reference. Its role comes from the sentencing legislation, which tells courts what they must weigh. At Commonwealth level, s 16A(2)(m) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) lists the character, antecedents, age, means and physical or mental condition of the person, a mandatory consideration whenever a state court sentences for a federal offence such as social security fraud. The common law sits underneath: Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267 confirms that good character remains relevant, but that its weight may be much reduced where the offender's reputation helped them commit the crime.

Character evidence on sentence is not one thing. A reference can speak to previous good character, and it can also support findings that the offender is unlikely to reoffend, has good prospects of rehabilitation, or has shown genuine remorse. Those are separate mitigating factors that survive where good character itself is restricted. The distinction now matters most in New South Wales, where Parliament has passed the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Good Character at Sentencing) Act 2026 (NSW), which commences on a date fixed by proclamation.

The rules of evidence are relaxed at sentence. In NSW, s 4(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) applies the Act to sentencing only where the court directs, which is why an unsworn letter is accepted at all. The trade-off is that the prosecutor can object to a reference or ask for the referee to attend for questioning. Legal Aid NSW publishes practical guidance on preparing character references for the Local Court, including the instruction to bring the original letter and three copies on the day.

The most common trigger is a plea of guilty in the Local or Magistrates Court to a drink driving, drug driving or speeding offence where the licence is at stake. An employer confirming that the defendant drives for work gives the magistrate concrete material on disqualification. Employers usually write on letterhead and confirm role and length of service, details already recorded in the Australian employment contracts and workplace letters.

The next scenario is an application to avoid a conviction being recorded. First offenders in teaching, nursing, finance or any role needing a Working with Children Check have the most to lose, and references are often the strongest evidence that the offence was out of character. Sentencing in the District or County Court is the third setting, where three or four references from different parts of the defendant's life are normal and quality beats volume.

Two edge cases deserve a flag. In parenting disputes, s 69ZT of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) relaxes the rules of evidence, but the court still expects facts in affidavit form, so a letter is best used as the basis of a sworn statement alongside a parenting plan under s 63C of the Family Law Act. Federal offences are the other trap, because a reference tendered in a state court for a Commonwealth crime is assessed under s 16A, not the state sentencing statute.

The opening block identifies the court, the matter and the defendant exactly as they appear on the court attendance notice, then sets out the referee's own standing: occupation, years in that role, community positions, and whether they hold any criminal record.

The body carries the substance, built around what courts consistently look for.

• Knowledge of the charge comes first, named in plain terms (for example "high range PCA" rather than "the incident"), with a sentence confirming the defendant told the referee about it personally.
• How long has the referee known the defendant, and in what capacity? The template asks for both, because ten years as a work supervisor reads differently from ten years as a neighbour.
• A specific example of character goes further than adjectives. The form prompts the referee for one real episode of reliability, honesty or community service.
• Where the defendant has done something since the offence, such as a traffic offender program, counselling or abstinence, the referee records what they have personally observed.

The closing section deals with prior convictions where they exist, states the referee's view that the offending was out of character, and ends with a contact line inviting the court to call if anything needs clarifying. The template deliberately leaves out any suggestion of what penalty the court should impose, because that belongs to the defence solicitor's submissions.

New South Wales is in transition. Good character is listed as a mitigating factor in s 21A(3)(f) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), and character also appears in the s 10(3)(a) test for dismissing a charge without conviction. Sexual offences are already carved out by s 21A(5AA). Once proclaimed, the Good Character at Sentencing Act 2026 removes s 21A(3)(f), strips "character" from s 10(3)(a), and bars evidence led solely to establish good character. References stay relevant to remorse, rehabilitation and the likelihood of reoffending under s 21A(3)(g) to (i), so the template steers NSW referees toward observed conduct rather than general praise. Confirm with the defence solicitor whether the reform is in force on the sentencing date before the letter is finalised.

In Victoria, s 5(2)(f) of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) lists the offender's previous character as a sentencing factor, and s 5AA removes good character from the scales for certain sexual offences where it facilitated the crime. References carry particular weight on applications to proceed without recording a conviction, where s 8(1)(b) directs the court to the character and past history of the offender. The Magistrates' Court of Victoria expects referees to stay away from recommending a sentence.

Queensland courts must consider the offender's character, age and intellectual capacity under s 9(2)(f) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), and s 12(2)(b) repeats the character test when the court decides whether to record a conviction. Recent amendments confine the mitigating weight of good character for some offence categories to its bearing on rehabilitation and the risk of reoffending, which suits a reference built on concrete observation.

By contrast, courts in Western Australia have no dedicated character factor and no statutory carve-out for child sexual offences. References are tendered under s 8(1) of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), which admits any factor reducing culpability. They also support spent conviction orders under s 45, where the court must be satisfied the offender is unlikely to reoffend.

You begin by choosing the state or territory and the court level, which sets the correct form of address and the court name on the first line. The questionnaire then collects the defendant's full name, the charge or charges, and the court location exactly as printed on the court attendance notice or charge sheet.

The referee's details come next. You enter their occupation, how long they have held it, any community roles, and the relationship with the defendant. From there the form asks short questions in plain English: how the referee learned about the charge, what they think of the defendant's character, one concrete example, and what changes they have noticed since. Each answer slots into the matching paragraph in the first person, so the letter still sounds like the referee.

Once you have reviewed the preview, you download the letter, the referee prints it (on letterhead where possible), signs and dates it by hand, and returns the original to the defence solicitor. Your other personal legal documents for Australians sit in the same account, so reissuing a letter for an adjourned hearing takes minutes.

The mistake that costs most often is a referee who does not mention the offence, or describes it vaguely, because the magistrate cannot tell whether the opinion was formed with full knowledge. Close behind is the letter that tells the court what sentence to impose or criticises the police, which undercuts the referee's credibility. Unsigned letters, printed emails and references from people under 18 carry little or no weight.

Some errors carry real consequences. A reference written by the defendant and signed by someone else, or one that overstates the referee's knowledge, can expose both people to a charge of perverting the course of justice under s 319 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and its interstate equivalents. Never send the letter straight to the court: it goes to the defence solicitor, who decides whether to tender it. Anyone writing for a family law matter should check with the family's lawyer whether an affidavit is required, as the family and divorce templates for Australian proceedings explain.